• On TechRepublic: Five super-secret features in Windows 7
June 23, 2009 6:47 AM PDT

Legendary high-end speaker gets major face-lift

by Steve Guttenberg

Wilson Audio's latest, the Sasha W/P speaker.

(Credit: Steve Guttenberg)

Wilson Audio Specialties didn't invent high-end speakers, but its original WATT speaker, introduced in 1986, changed the rules of the game.

Up to that point, state-of-the-art speakers were all large beasts, but the WATT was a comparatively tiny stand-mounted speaker. Its distinctive pyramidal shape went on to spawn countless imitations.

The WATT was soon joined by the matching Puppy (woofer), and over the ensuing decades the two-piece WATT/Puppy system evolved, culminating in the WATT/Puppy 8 in 2006. Well over 15,000 WATT/Puppys have been sold since 1986, but rather than move to the W/P 9, founder David Wilson decided to start afresh, so now we have the Sasha W/P ($26,900/pair).

Wilson Audio Specialties' director of sales, Peter McGrath, came to New York City to present the Sasha W/P to the press at Wilson dealer Innovative Audio last week. The new speaker's sweeping curves and refined shape make for the best-looking Wilson speaker of all time.

It's a three-way design, with a 1-inch inverted dome tweeter, 7-inch midrange, and two 8-inch woofers elegantly housed within the 197-pound cabinet. Build quality is off-the-charts impressive, and the 12-step automotive paint job is absolutely flawless. The tweeter and midrange drivers are identical to the ones used in the $68,000 Wilson MAXX Series 3 speakers. Wilson Audio just recently expanded its factory in Provo, Utah.

McGrath played a mix of music styles that night, but his own high-resolution classical recordings were the ones most breathtakingly rendered by the Sasha W/P. It was one of those rare, "you are there" audio experiences where you feel transported to the musical event. The Sasha W/P's ability to unravel massive works with ease is what separates it from merely excellent high-end speakers. The Sasha W/P can unleash uninhibited dynamic contrasts that belie its modest footprint.

Steve Guttenberg is a frequent contributor to magazines and Web sites including Home Entertainment, Playback, and Ultimate AV. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network, and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
Recent posts from The Audiophiliac
NYC high-end audio store parties like it's 1999
Audioengine P4: The little $249 speaker that could
Wanted: A basic home theater receiver?
When the Rolling Stones were the world's greatest band
Three of the year's best full-size headphones
JH Audio in-ear headphones: Worth $1,099?
Buying a home theater system? Read this book
Denon's supereasy-to-use USB turntable
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (13 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by PhoenixFiresky June 23, 2009 9:07 AM PDT
Hmmm...$27,000...for something that looks just like a trash can? Nope. Can't see it.
Reply to this comment
by lodestar2 June 23, 2009 11:15 AM PDT
Well, hm. I'm a fan of this blog. I've always found it to be entertaining and informative. but I'm having a hard time imagining the aesthetic criteria according to which this is an attractive speaker. Calling this a beautiful speaker has the unfortunate effect of making high-end audio look like something along the lines of the emperor's new clothes. And that's too bad, because it isn't really fair. I'm sure the Sasha W/P sounds absolutely amazing. But yes, it looks like a trash can, and there's no point in pretending otherwise.
by alegr June 23, 2009 3:59 PM PDT
Trash can. That was my first thought, too.
by pubmat June 24, 2009 7:17 AM PDT
I think seeing them in person is essential. I have a local store that sells them, and they are pretty impressive in person: the paint is amazing, their curves are quite appealing, and they are like little tanks in build quality. Besides, their sound quality (which is what I care about most) is truly seductive.
by tipoo_ June 23, 2009 11:01 AM PDT
I can imagine friends trying to figure out where they put their empty beer cans in the thing.
Reply to this comment
by wdlee123 June 23, 2009 6:33 PM PDT
Two things. First, what a brilliant idea, Wilson introduces a post recession $27,000 pair of speakers. They are sure feeling our pain. Secondly, SteveG is writing a lot of reviews these days and not a negative one to be found! I am beginning to question his sensibilities and objectivity. The trash can reference is funny!
Reply to this comment
by pubmat June 24, 2009 7:11 AM PDT
First, stop whining, and stop being jealous of prosperity. This is a BLOG, and a little oogling at great audio equipment is encouraged here. Its all in fun, so I suggest learning to have some once in a while. Second, you probably don't read it much because Steve is plenty critical of things on here...but its difficult to be critical of the most successful high end speakers ever.
If that isn't good enough for you, then go somewhere else. I'm sure there's a whiner's blog out there that will welcome you with open arms.
by one_flat_monkey June 23, 2009 7:41 PM PDT
my favorite part of high-end audio is that you can charge whatever you want for an amp or a pair of speakers and someone will decide that it's a reasonable price. it doesn't really have anything to do with the cost of materials. it's all subsumed under R & D.

i've only made three decent purchases, ones that i can say were good "investments":

a) Magnepan 1.4 speakers
b) Linn LP12 turntable
c) Akai GX 635 reel to reel tape deck.

i've never been completely satisfied with an amplifier. but ( of course ), i'm not willing to spend 10K on a pair of Class A tube amps that put out 16 watts, like the Air Tight ATM211.
Reply to this comment
by TXinD76121 June 24, 2009 9:26 AM PDT
I consider the Wilson WATT Puppy to be more like the original fraud on the public. It helped start the whole runaway-price insanity that has essentially crippled the audio hobby and gradually infected the whole specialist audio industry--a garden path that has led up to today's iPod/MP3 music standard and to the public's complete dismissal of good sound as an ideal. Wilson speakers are store-bought drivers in over-damped enclosures, and nothing at all (no, not even looks) to justify being as expensive as a nice car.

Wilson speakers don't even sound that good. I worked in a store that had WIlson WATT Puppies driven by a Krell Audio Standard (four-piece mega-amp of the era, about $25,000 at the time), set up to a fare-thee-well, and I spent hours listening to it. Just nothing special. (The best thing about that whole setup was watching the manager's face as five Asian friends took turns buying the KAS--politely stepping up to the counter one after the other saying "me too please." They dropped $125k collectively that day. The manager thought he'd died and gone to heaven. That was worth seeing.) You can keep making hi-fi equipment more and more expensive, and the best thing you can say about it is that, like equipment that is still good but much cheaper, it also works. There is just nothing magic about megabuck audio--some of it is good, some of it is bad, most of it is so-so. It's really only good for perfectionists with bad OCD problems and over-monied people concerned with displays of status and exclusivity. Whoever spends the most and has the most absurd-looking turntable wins.

Still, he's the Emperor, so you have to doff your hat I guess.
Reply to this comment
by June 24, 2009 9:39 PM PDT
Not everyone can drop $30K on a pair of speakers and then another $5K - $8K on cables. If you can afford to buy these toys, then these Ferrari Yellow or Bugatti Blue "Trash" cans _are_ one of the best speakers money can buy IMHO. You just have to listen to see if it is worth your hard earn dough. Like any other audio gear, the cost per satisfaction is not linear. One may be perfectly happy with a $500 set of HTIB. Go listen and be your judge.
Reply to this comment
by buzzvader June 25, 2009 2:40 PM PDT
What a shame that such good sounding speakers should like like trash cans. I'm tempted to push in the tops to deposit something. What was the designer thinking? You need them to look like this to sound good? Dahlquists looked good. Ohm's looked better than these. Magnepans not only look great but sound awesome! My large walnut Advents look better than these and sound pretty good, too.
Reply to this comment
by sspadafo July 2, 2009 1:18 AM PDT
by tipoo_ June 23, 2009 11:01 AM PDT
I can imagine friends trying to figure out where they put their empty beer cans in the thing.

LMAO!!
Reply to this comment
by amfx22000 August 13, 2009 11:10 AM PDT
Ha ha ha ha! That looks like a f*cking trash can!
Reply to this comment
(13 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

After 5 years, Firefox faces new challenges

Mozilla helped reshape the Web since releasing Firefox 1.0 five years ago. Now it's got a reawakened Microsoft and Google Chrome to reckon with.

There's a map for that: GPS or smartphone?

Almost every handset comes with mapping software these days, but standalone GPS devices are becoming more affordable than ever.

advertisement

About The Audiophiliac

Ex movie theater projectionist Steve Guttenberg has more or less successfully hitched his future to home theater, but he still pines for the clickity-clack of 35 MM projectors and all the stale popcorn he could eat. Between projectionist gigs he worked as a high-end audio salesman for sixteen years, and produced records for an audiophile label. Oh, and one more thing, nothing annoys Steve more than being confused with the other Steve Guttenberg, the washed-up Police Academy actor. The wordsmith Guttenberg is a frequent contributor to a number of magazines and websites including Home Entertainment, Playback, and Ultimate AV. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.

Add this feed to your online news reader

The Audiophiliac topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right